Best of the B1G: Running Backs

[DexterMorgan]

You don't seem to get the point there. In the Big 12, most of the base Ds were nickel formations or similar sets designed more to defend against the pass.

As an immediate trade-off, the Big 12 was necessarily weaker when defending against the run.

Your example of Northwestern, Indiana, and Minnesota doesn't apply ... because those teams still play in a conference that places more emphasis on running the ball. It doesn't matter much what their own particular offense runs.

No not one backs stats. But the fact remains as I pointed out, when Nebraska's D which is ranked right up there was ran at they failed. When Misserys D which if I recall right was like top in red zone D going into the Insight bowl, was ran at they failed. I dont follow b12 enough to do it and just dont have the time, as I follow b10, but I would be VERY interested to see how many losses of the better teams in the b12 came at the hands of running teams.

Fair points.

 

[olddude]

Fair points.

Well I might be a little anal about it, but when breaking everything down, I have to look at everything. Just like a home game gives advantages so does all this. Like I said I am not down on Rex. But all this does affect the numbers, even if it's slightly.

 

[lightning1]

The differences I see in the defenses in the B10 vs B12 are the physical nature.
B10 defenses are geared to stop the running game and are a little more physical in nature, by necessity. That, by itself doesnt make one defense tougher than another. But it does take a greater toll on the health of your offense, over the course of the season.
You will get smacked in the mouth by a physical defense, every week in the B10. After 5 or 6 confence games, injuries to your offensive players start to mount. Thats when you lose games you wouldnt normally lose.
Thats the biggest adjustment Nebraska will face in the B10, IMO.
I expect the injury bug to bite them harder then they are used to, the first couple of seasons in conference play.

 

[olddude]

The differences I see in the defenses in the B10 vs B12 are the physical nature.
B10 defenses are geared to stop the running game and are a little more physical in nature, by necessity. That, by itself doesnt make one defense tougher than another. But it does take a greater toll on the health of your offense, over the course of the season.
You will get smacked in the mouth by a physical defense, every week in the B10. After 5 or 6 confence games, injuries to your offensive players start to mount. Thats when you lose games you wouldnt normally lose.
Thats the biggest adjustment Nebraska will face in the B10, IMO.
I expect the injury bug to bite them harder then they are used to, the first couple of seasons in conference play.

Yes from a purely Nebraska point, I agree. They might have a tougher time than they thought.
From a RB point in general barring any injuries, wiskey and Mich St are sitting pretty good, with Iowa and OH needing one more to step up and take some pressure off of one back. Coker has the speed and a good size, and is a punishing runner, what I would like to see, is a bigger yet, 4th and 1or2 type back that can bring up our numbers in that area. Someone who you just cant stand up, someone who takes two defenders to bring down. I know we are not about taking risks, but a few (not all the time) 4th down conversions would really help. The coaches take risks on these kids when they recruit them, have some faith in them.
We have been playing EVERY team tough for years now, our game plan is soild, but who knows when you throw 3 or 4 more conversions in to season, those L's could have been W's. We all know there is a right time to call for that, but thats not saying with a back like I described, wouldnt be helping out thruout the whole game anyway.
Just a thought.

 

[cmhawks99]

Yes from a purely Nebraska point, I agree. They might have a tougher time than they thought.
From a RB point in general barring any injuries, wiskey and Mich St are sitting pretty good, with Iowa and OH needing one more to step up and take some pressure off of one back. Coker has the speed and a good size, and is a punishing runner, what I would like to see, is a bigger yet, 4th and 1or2 type back that can bring up our numbers in that area. Someone who you just cant stand up, someone who takes two defenders to bring down. I know we are not about taking risks, but a few (not all the time) 4th down conversions would really help. The coaches take risks on these kids when they recruit them, have some faith in them.
We have been playing EVERY team tough for years now, our game plan is soild, but who knows when you throw 3 or 4 more conversions in to season, those L's could have been W's. We all know there is a right time to call for that, but thats not saying with a back like I described, wouldnt be helping out thruout the whole game anyway.
Just a thought.

Howdy Old dude,

Listen you and I agree more often than not I just want to remind you of the 4th down vs MSU in 2008 where a FG would have won the game. Honestly KF conservative though he may still be takes some chances and so does KOK.....you probably also remember the fake FG in the orange bowl...again I was OK with it but not what I'd have done.

The point being though I know you are very level headed and far seeing that's the kind of thing some of the critics forget when they are complaining & THEN they turn around and say...well he shouldn't have done it there ...LOL

Chad

 

[olddude]

Howdy Old dude,

Listen you and I agree more often than not I just want to remind you of the 4th down vs MSU in 2008 where a FG would have won the game. Honestly KF conservative though he may still be takes some chances and so does KOK.....you probably also remember the fake FG in the orange bowl...again I was OK with it but not what I'd have done.

The point being though I know you are very level headed and far seeing that's the kind of thing some of the critics forget when they are complaining & THEN they turn around and say...well he shouldn't have done it there ...LOL

Chad

Just saying. I know they do take risks, I am fine with their play calling. The only time they have ever really pizzed me off was last year with wiskey, and that was clock management. It sure would be nice to have a blaster you could call up to pound it forward. It kinda takes some of the risk out of it, when you know 99 times out of a hundred he will get it done. With a good O line this year, I could see where a BIG back could help in some situations. looking forward I like what they are trying to put together. Sounds like a christmas card but they are trying to put together "a back for all seasons" type backfield, whoops you want speed, got it, or you want power got that to, ect.